Tuesday, October 24, 2017

The Stench of Our Understanding

We have not posted anything for a while because we have been contemplating the direction and purpose of our blog. We have always wanted this to be no more than an honest and open exposition of Joseph Duncan's thoughts and experiences, as a kind of glimpse into the mind of a human being that many call "monster". The idea - the hope - has always been that by doing this, then perhaps those who are ready will find for themselves that we are them, and that the only monsters in this world are the ones we imagine, and create for ourselves.

But it has come to our attention that by literating with singular first person pronouns, we are inevitably giving the impression that this blog is about Joseph Duncan, when it has never been about him at all. His mind is no more than a psychological sponge that has soaked up the dross and drit excuded by all of us. The Fifth Nail has only ever endeavored to squeeze the contents of that spone onto the page, and let the pattern that emerges be read like an inkblot which says more about the person seeing it than it does about the one who has made the stain.

So from now on we will speak only using plural pronouns as often as we can in order to emphasize that this blog is not about one person. We will also attempt to shift our focus more on expressing our thoughts in a more general form, so they can be seen as thoughts coming from a sponge that has been used to whipe society's ass, and not from the mind of some "evil monster" that we imagine in order to convince ourselves that we're not the one's to blame for the mess. But prisons are the outhouses of the culture we live in, so we have no one but ourselves to blame for the offensive "smell" that wafts from within. Everyone has to shit, so no one is "innocent". So take a good whiff, my friend, because it is both you and I that are making this stench, not just "me".

In Haiti, workers empty communal outhouses at night and in the dark to avoid public scrutiny and humiliation.

Thursday, June 8, 2017

Old Rules, New Rules, and the Rule of Law?

Last month, the warden announced (via Inmate Bulletin) that the original inmate property limits would be once more strictly enforced after a hiatus that had been going on for longer than I've been here (over at least the last nine years and probably much longer). The limit imposed by policy is five books per inmate, 25 personal letters, 1 laundry bag, etc. etc.. It is a well-known prison "management" tactic to relax certain policies so prisoners will take the leeway for granted. And then, when a "correctional staff" member needs to unofficially "punish" a prisoner, they can do so by arbitrarily "enforcing" the policy that has been previously unenforced, thus legally imposing a "hardship" on the prisoner otherwise not allowed by numerous state and Federal regulations. So, the fact that the warden is suddenly deciding that the leeway on inmate property limits is no longer necessary, must be an indication that he thinks he can control inmate behavior by some other means.

Of course it is all only a delusion of power and control in the first place. Regardless of what rules, laws, or regulations that are enforced or not enforced, the ultimate truth remains the same: You can't control what other people think, and if you can't control what they think, then you can't control what they do. They might let you think you are controlling them (when inmates do this, it is called "manipulative criminal behavior" - but, of course, the only reason we (prisoners) do it, is to avoid getting punished arbitrarily - and any prisoner will tell you that all punishment in prison, whether official or unofficial, is completely arbitrary; so the "the trick" is to avoid it and the only way to do that is to become "manipulative"), but, in the end, the only thing the warden and other "officials" ever manage to do is to sustain an illusion of control that serves to justify their fat paychecks and allows them to rationalize the inhuman ways they treat other human beings.

This latest decision to suddenly start enforcing a previously unenforced impingement on our humanity is a pretty good example of how this illusion is created. Here in the SCU (Special Confinement Unit, a.k.a. "Death Row") in Terre Haute, IN, we are confined to our cells 23/7 (or very close to 24/7 for someone like me who rarely bothers to ask to be cuffed up and escorted to a box-shaped cage with a ball in it that they call "recreation"), our books and letters are the only things we have that connect us to the outside (a.k.a. "real") world. Sure, we have small color T.V.s, but the program selection is controlled completely by the prison and consists almost entirely of brain-numbing (and "washing") cop shows and Christian propaganda (a.k.a. "feel good") programs. Only in my books do I find useful information that encourages me to think for myself rather than let others think (and form opinions) for me. And only through my letters do I get to discuss those ideas and exchange opinions with other people who are interested in the same sorts of things I am.

So the limit of five books in my cell, with no access to the Internet or even a prison library (see: Note 1) very effectively and quite literally cuts me off from my most valuable source of "intellectual stimulation" (as they call it). And the 25 letters restriction reduces my ability to effectively and meaningfully correspond with my family and friends by limiting the depth of our "discussions" to what I can retain in my immediate memory (plus 25 letters), which isn't very much.

To give you an idea of what I'm talking about, because of the leeway on the number of books and letters we have been allowed to keep in the past, I had previously been able to keep a small collection of reference books in my cell (20 to 25 books at most) on various subjects, from Quantum Physics to Religions of the world, including a few books on how to draw, and even several books I am using to study foreign language. Learning another language is very important to me, even if it's the last significant thing I learn before I die, because it is the language of my one true love - the person who my entire life was meant to acknowledge (yes, my "soul-mate" - which even I have!) So, I will keep three books to help me learn my love's native (human) language, which leaves me with only two more books that I am allowed to have. If I want to have something to read, then I must use these two slots for "current interests" and essentially get rid of all my "reference" books, including my NIV/KJV Bible, my Webster's College Dictionary, My Philosophy and Religion Dictionary, all of my other "Religion" books (Hindu, Zen, etc.) and all my "textbooks" (calculus, biology, physics, etc.) that I use as additional reference while reading (I generally don't keep a book as a "reference" unless I actually reference it frequently).

But, worse still is the restriction imposed upon the numbers of personal letters I am allowed to keep. My fiancée writes me at least twice a week, and has been for the last several years. I've already gone through all of my letters from her alone in the past and gotten rid of more than half (just to reduce the number of letters to a few manila envelopes full). But now I must go through those and select fewer than 25? (I'd like to keep some letters from my mother and a few friends, too.) That's not just heartbreaking, it's heartrending. It takes away my most valuable possessions, and reduces my connection to those whom I love (and whom I know love me) to what I can hold in just one hand.

The result, of course, is a powerful urge to revel against the "authority" that is causing me this pain. It is an urge for retribution that all prisoners feel. It is what drives them to be so "manipulative", and to find other ways to keep their humanness alive. It was this "urge" that ultimately drove me to do the insanely violent things I did that got me on "Death Row" in the first place. And even though I knew my "retribution" would put me here - and subject me to more of their "delusions of power and control" over my life (and what I think). To me, the satisfaction of proving they controlled nothing (they didn't stop me from raping and killing - all they ever did was make me want to rape and kill even more!) was (and still is) worth it.

So, I'm not "crying" about the way I'm being treated now. Make no mistake, I'm only trying to point out the way all their efforts to control me, and those "like" me (other human beings who don't value what "they" value") only end up doing the exact opposite of what they contend (and pretend). It's not about me or what I did, or what "they" do to me at all. It is a "mentality", a "sickness" that spreads and contaminates all of us. The wardens in this world (as a metaphor and literally) will always seek to rationalize their power and justify their insanity. They will push for more and more "control" over their "wards", as they have always done and will continue to do (see: Note 2). The Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) has recently imposed a restriction on prisoners in Texas prohibiting them from "maintaining active social media accounts for the purpose of soliciting, updating, or engaging others, through a third-party or otherwise". In other words, Texas wards - in response to the threat that the truth (information) about conditions in prison imposes upon their illusion (and delusion) of power and control - have responded (as they always have in the past) by once more attempting to "gag" the prisoners. Whether they succeed or not will be telling (it is, of course, being challenged by numerous "human rights" groups). If they can get away with such a restriction (and it's simply a matter of time before they can get away with anything they want, because the illusion must be maintained at any cost), then it will spread quickly to other states and I'll soon be restricted even from expressing my thoughts here on this blog. Why? Well, like they say, if you have to ask... then you're not likely to understand the answer.

[J.D. May 29, 2017]



Notes:
(1) There have also been newly imposed limits on the total number of books available for ILL (Inter-library loan) requests, which was the only already extremely limited library access we had.

(2) It is an established tactic of those in authority (a.k.a. "Big Brother") to instigate disobedience before they attempt to institute a new and potentially controversial means of control. This not only creates a kind of distraction, but it also serves as a demonstrable justification for the new rule of law that they intend to impose.

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

Merry Christmas From Death Row

I haven't really written much for 5NChronicles because not much really happens here on Federal death row; at least not much that I can write about without getting someone in trouble. I generally "lay low" and don't do anything to draw attention to myself either from the guards or other prisoners. Most of the really "bad" (small-minded trouble-makers) guards have been moved out of the unit (not by my doing, since I've never formally complained nor mentioned any names the few times I wrote about their antics here on the Fifth Nail --- oh, except for counselor Edwards. I couldn't really avoid mentioning his name because he was the unit "counselor").

Right this minute, the other prisoners are arguing over who's after who in the "line" for the phone. This is "normal". They act like it's the most important thing in the world, yelling at and insulting each other constantly. The "line" is just an informal agreement for who's next. If someone wants to use the phone (a black old-fashioned push-button phone with handset and receiver from the 1970s that has a long cord so it can be passed by the guards from cell to cell) then they must yell out, "Put me in line for the phone!" and then whoever is last in line is supposed to yell back, "You're after me!". But, what usually happens is someone forgets where they are in the "line" and so they yell out "You're after me" when they're not last, or maybe someone else yells, "You're after so-and-so", and the line gets all "messed up" and then the arguments inevitably ensue when someone realizes they got "bumped" out of "line". It happens several times a day. I try to avoid the arguments by not asking to use the phone when there is a long line, or a line with certain people "in" it that never remember who they are after who's after them, nor do they even pay attention to who's asking to "get in line", until they suspect they got "bumped" (because they weren't paying attention). It's a typical madhouse. (And if I ever get in the middle of one of the arguments I always just say, "Never mind, I don't need the phone that bad", and let them argue among themselves; which they seem to enjoy.) (Note: The Inmate Telephone System, or "ITS", is set up so each prisoner must "log on" to make a call using a sequence of numbers followed by a voice recognition validation. Once they are logged on they can only call numbers that have been approved for each inmate, and then they can only talk for 15 minutes before the call cuts off and the prisoner must wait 30 minutes from the end of their last call before they can make another call. That's the reason the phone gets passed so much between cells, and the reason prisoners "get back in line" over and over, so they can talk to their friends and loved ones for more than one 15 minute session, which is barely enough time to even say "hello" in terms of any real meaningful conversation. The "ITS" is designed to "thwart" abuse of "telephone privileges". But, all it really thwarts, as usual, is prisoner social contact --- the one and only thing shown to be more important for reducing recidivism than even education. Go figure...)

I know I seem to complain a lot about being in prison. But, the truth be known, I don't really mind being here at all. I told a friend (pen-pal) recently that being on "death row" is just another place to be. The food is terrible, but much better than it could be --- if you consider history, for example, which I usually do. The cells are cold, but I can take a warm shower any time I feel like it (each cell has a stainless steel shower stall), even in the middle of the night if I want. I am thousands of miles away from my family, friends, and fiancée, whom I can barely afford to call 15 minutes at a time (prisoners must pay 90 cent for local calls, $3.10 for national calls, and $14.85 for all international calls; so it gets expensive; and, of course, prohibitive). But, I know I am loved, and I can write my heart out (stamps are cheap and stationary is free) anytime I feel a little lonely. I don't get bored easily, so the T.V. (13' HDTV with about 20 channels, all provided and paid for by the prison to keep the prisoners pacified) and my books to keep me "entertained". I also have an MP3-player with over 400 selections of music and meditation tracks that help me relax and/or "escape" into my mind anytime I want as well (which is very helpful when I don't want to listen to the telephone arguments, for example) by just putting on my headphones (KOSS CL-20s) and turning up the volume.

All-in-all, I think I have it "pretty good", considering. My state of mind is steady and quiet most of the time. I have few worries, since death (as something to worry about) is "off the table" as far as I'm concerned. In fact, the two biggest worries in my life right now are losing my health, and losing contact with my fiancée; both of which are "problems" that death could in fact easily resolve! (And I mean that in only the most serious and upbeat way --- since, for me at least, death is a perfectly valid "solution"). If my health goes south, I can just "volunteer" to be executed, and hence be rid of my useless body. And if something happens with my fiancée, whom I love with all that I am, then I would not even need to "volunteer" in order to know that we will be together again some day --- because that is the promise that love makes.

So, I might even say I am "happy", at least relatively speaking. I am loved, I am comfortable, I am entertained, and I am not confined (within my own mind): What more could anyone want? Christmas dinner, of course! And we get that once a year, too. A feast fit for nearly any king (in history at least), thanks to the modern miracles of agriculture and commerce. So, I'm not complaining at all really. I'm just trying to record things as they are. And if that sounds like I'm complaining... well, that's not my fault either; it's just the way things are.

Merry Christmas!

[J.D. December 24, 2016]

Thursday, October 6, 2016

«Child Porn» Update: Children Have Breasts?

I got a response back from the B.O.P. Regional Director, Sara M. Revell, on the appeal I filed over being accused of (and harshly punished for) having “child porn” in my cell because a friend sent me a picture from Vogue magazine's website of a famous French child model wearing pants but no shirt in a perfume advertisement. The girl, Thylane Blondeau, is only ten years old, and as flat-chested as any boy her age. But the B.O.P.'s official response to my appeal claims, “The child's breasts do not have to be developed to be considered breasts.” (A direct quote.)

The director also now (out of the blue) claims that I did not receive the pictures in the mail, despite the fact that I have provided a clear copy of the letter I received with the pictures that speficially refers to and describes the pictures enclosed. The reason the director makes this claim (that I didn't get the pictures in the mail) is because according to B.O.P. policy I can't be found guilty if the “contraband” was issued to me through “regular institutional channels”.

So the director is not only redefining “breasts”, but she is also reinventing the facts of the matter in order to justify punishing me for doing nothing wrong except “offending staff's sensibilities” by being a “sex offender who is not authorized to possess sexually suggestive pictures of children”. (Another direct quote from an earlier DHO report concerning this same incident.) Nevermind that B.O.P. policy also does not allow “special restrictions for sex offenders” unless they are at an SOMP institution and have been informed of said restrictions (which I never have).

So now I am forced to appeal, again, to the Central Office in Washington, D.C. The last time I appealed this same incident to the D.C. office I never got a response. Since D.C. is the last chance for “remedy” in the B.O.P., if they deny my appeal I can take my complaint to a judge (which you can't do until after you have exhausted all other “remedies”). So not responding now allows them to respond later, after I file a lawsuit. And if they dismiss the incident then that lawsuit must also be dismissed. So not responding is a tactic they use to avoid trouble in court, and hence get away with violating their own policies if an inmate chooses not to file a new lawsuit (which takes a lot of time and money).

I don't know if they will respond this time or not (they're supposed to respond within two months, but technically they can take as long as they “need”). But if they don't then my attorney has already promised to help me file a lawsuit since this so-called “child porn” can have a devastating effect on any future hearings in my death penalty cases (which is the only reason I am spending so much time and effort on all these appeals).

This is a very typical example of how “The System” maintains the “appearance of justice” while acting arbitrarily and according to its own distorted “sensibilities” (where prepubescent children have breasts, and “sex offenders” can be punished just for being a “sex offender”). If you think, like many do, that I have no call to complain (or otherwise expose the truth) because of my “crimes against children”, then you are like “them”, who see only the small picture in front of them (the one they spend so much time painting to look like “justice”). In the big picture – and in reality – this kind of distortion of the truth leads more directly than those obsessed with the small picture can imagine to the continued manifestation of child murder and rape. No, I will never get out, and hence never rape or kill children again. But, I'm not the only one this kind of “justice” is being “painted” on.

I was in prison once before, remember, and I was treated the same then as I am being treated now. Except, last time I did get out, and I couldn't wait to “set things straight” when I did. And now when the guards here spit in my food, or threaten to kill me if I request recreation time, or punish me for having a picture of a girl with no shirt and calling it “child porn”, I just think to myself, sadly, how the cycle continues, and wonder how many more children must be raped and murdered before it ends.

[J.D. September 26, 2016]

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

«Child Porn» Redo

The «Incident Report» that they used as an excuse to «punish» me for having so-called «child porn» in my cell (that was really just a picture I received in a letter of a professional child model wearing no shirt for a perfume ad in Vogue magazine) got «returned» to the UDC (Unit Disciplinary Committee) because it was only a «300 level» (not serious) write up, and it was the first write up I ever got at any level. The UDC originally referred it to the DHO (Disciplinary Hearing Officer) so he could impose a more serious sanction than the UDC were allowed to (I ended up losing four months of phone and commissary «privileges», in addition to a $75 «fine», which was all the money I had in my account at the time).

The only real difference is that the UDC is not allowed to impose a monetary fine. So, I got my $75 returned. But, the UDC (Unit staff) still found me «guilty», and additionally claimed in their «reasons for findings» that the child was «nude», which she was not at all (she had pants on, and was much too young to have breasts to «display»). I truly think «they» (B.O.P. staff) were hoping that I'd drop my appeals (and lawsuit) if they let me have the money back. They can't give me back the four months of not being able to call my family (mom and girlfriend) or being able to buy coffee or even salt for my food. So they imposed that as «time served».

Of course I appealed (it's not about the money or the punishment; it's about them ignoring their own rules and regulations and creating a false record --- that says I had «child porn» in my cell --- that can and likely will be used against me in court some day!). In fact, I filed three separate issues of appeal: One, that the UDC falsely claimed the child was nude; Two, that the picture was issued to me in an opened an inspected letter, so I had no reason to think I was not allowed to have it; and Three, that the picture does not in fact violate any rules of policies (or laws, needless to say).

But, the second and third issues were not accepted on appeal. Only the first issue was processed, and eventually (nonsensically) denied (of course). The other issues, which are directly supported by B.O.P. policies, were simply ignored. Apparently, even the forms I submitted for these issues were just discarded, and not even officially «rejected» or anything.

So now technically I can't even appeal these other issues to the Regional Office level because policy says I can only further appeal issues that are in the original appeal! So they seem to be trying to block my appeal (in much the same way they did the first time when I tried to appeal the original DHO decision). All I can, and will, do is file a complaint to the Regional Office against the institution for (again) refusing to process my appeals, and hope the Regional Office eventually forces them to process all the issues of my appeal the way they did last time. I really don't care whether they grant or deny my appeals based on the issues I raised, since I can't be «punished» any more than I already have. But, I need some sort of response one way or another for the lawsuit that my attorney is helping me file for violating my (so-called) «due process» rights --- which, even after they have been watered down by the courts for prison discipline, are supposed to keep prison staff from arbitrarily punishing me like this, just because I'm a «sex offender» («special restrictions can be applied for «sex offenders», but only at special «SOMP» (Sex Offender Management Program) institutions, and only after the «offender» is told what the «special restrictions» are; I was never told about any special restrictions on me or my mail, before or since this «incident»).

So, the ordeal of my appeals being all over again (I must «exhaust» all institutional «remedies» and appeals before I can go to a Federal judge with a lawsuit); such we call «the workings of justice».

[J.D. July 8, 2016]

Thursday, March 3, 2016

So Much For Security (Guard and Inmate Stabbed on Death Row)

On Thursday, February 4, 2016, shortly after I had met with the Regional B.O.P. investigator about being denied formal redress (see "Child Porn" Saga Continues), a guard and the prisoner he was escorting in handcuffs, were both attacked and stabbed by a prisoner who was «accidently» let out of his cell unrestrained, here on death row. The unit was consequently locked down, and now rumor has it that changes on how this unit is run are coming down the «pipe» from the Regional office (perhaps because there was an investigator here from Regional when the «incident» happened). Several guards have already been removed from this unit (SCU, a.k.a. «death row»), and more rumors say the guard who «acciently» opened the wrong cell door was fired.

The big problem with this whole «incident» should be fairly obvious. The attack happened on the range (hallway of cells) directly below the one where I am celled, so I'm not personally familiar with the prisoners down there, though the prisoner who got stabbed is a «co-defendant» (crime partner of one of the prisoners on my range who I am familiar with (and get along with). The «word» is that the prisoner who got stabbed had complained several times about the other prisoner threatening him (i.e. he is a «rat»). So, the odds that the other prisoner's door got opened by «accident» just as the rat was being escorted past, is slim; and the fact that the attacked appeared to be ready for the «accident» to happen, with home-made knife (shank) in hand, ready to attack as soon when his door opened, is a pretty good indication that he wasn't the only one who wanted to hurt the rat.

The guard who «accidentally» opened the wrong door, and more than likely the guard who ended up getting stabbed while escorting the rat, had to be in on the attack. They probably told the prisoner to be ready for his door to open «accidetally» (this kind of «information exchange» happens often between guards and the prisoners they are «familiar» with – all sorts of rules are in place that are meant to prevent it, but it is one of those «human nature» things that no amount of rules or laws will ever stop). One of the guards could have simply whispered in the prisoner's cell, «Hey, if your door opens accidentally when the rat comes back from rec, don't do anything 'stupid'», which of course means, «Be ready».

The guards probably thought they were being «cool», and having some «fun» at the same time (a lot of guards thrive on violence even more than the prisoners – so they create situations like this so they can «do their job», and look like heroes, I suppose). But, I doubt if they expeted their patsy to come out of the cell armed with a shank! So the whole thing backfired, and even got the guard who was escorting the rat stabbed as he tried to «restrain» the attacker (this guard may or may not have been «in» on the «fun» - but the guard who «accidentally» opened the wrong door was definitely «in» on it).

So now changes are coming. The «rules» have failed once again (as they always do eventually), so now more rules will have to be made (the rulemakers – i.e. pharisees – never seem to realize that the rules never actually «fail», they just never work in the first place, and only appear to work at all by sheer chance, until the next «incident» occurs and more rules «need» to be made). The «up shot» is that all the other prisoners on death row will now loose more «privileges» and suffer more restrictions (i.e. «security measures») as a result (the new «rules» invariably only end up «punishing» the prisoners who had nothing to do with what happened). They've already assigned two fulltime lieutenants (one for day shift and one for swing) to the SCU, which is a small unit that never needed its own Lts before now. So, unless the new Lts plan on twiddling their thumbs all day and getting paid for it, they're most likely going to create some excitement of their own, to make themselves feel like «heroes» (i.e. useful) too. And that's not good for the prisoners... it never is. (As I heard the rat's co-defendant say – who himself is a solid convict as far as I'm concerned - «Shit rolls downhill, and we're at the bottom of the hill!»)

[J.D. February 17, 2016]

P.S. It may be interesting to note that the SCU (death row) unit is considered the most «secure» unit in a Federal «Super Max» (Maximum Security) prison. If government «officials» can't keep even one small unit secure in prison, then how can they keep the nation secure? They can't, never could, never will, but will always pretend they can, and take trillions of dollars to maintain their facade, and propaganda. «They» are the ones paid to be «heroes». (Paying someone to be a hero is like paying someone to be your lover; it's just a form of prostitution.)

Disclaimer: It should be obvious, I hope, that much of the information I've provided here is hearsay and not reliable. It is, however, the best information I have at this time, considerating that the B.O.P. is not in the habit of publishing news reports when «incidents» like this happen (and when they do ultimately decide to release information for public consumption, you can be sure it is not the whole story – so I hope I'll be excused for attempting to provide another «version» of the truth).


«Truth is singular. Its 'versions' are mistruths.' --- Fabricant, Somni 451, "Cloud Atlas"

«Child Porn» Saga Continues

Last year I was «disciplined» harshly, and fined $75, because of a picture of a prepubescent French model from Vogue magazine that I received in an opened and inspected letter through the regular inmate mail. Because she was shirtless, the guard who wrote me up thought it was «child porn», which it was not by any legal definition or prison policy.

I was consequently found guilty for having «unauthorized items» (Prison rule #305) and sanctioned to a loss of several «privileges» for four months. The DHO (Disciplinary Hearing Officer) also took all the money I had in my inmate account at the time as well.

In the DHO's official report he side-stepped the hard evidence (i.e. that the picture was issued to me in an inspected letter by staff, and did not violate any laws or prison privileges) and justified his guilty verdict by claiming special rules applied to me because I am a «sex offender» with crimes against children.

I, of course, appealed his decision, but even before I filed my appeal, I submitted an official complaint against the DHO for failing to comply with prison policy and Federal laws, and deliberately violating my (so-called) constitutional right to a «fair and impartial» hearing. My complaint was rejected by the prison administration seven times for false reasons. Each time I re-submitted my complaint with documented evidence that refuted the supposed reason it had been rejected.

I suspet that someone in administration was either protecting the DHO from having his conduct officially investigated, or they were protecting the warden, whose job it was to respond to the complaint, from a possible law suit (if he supported the DHO's decision to find me guilty, then it becomes a conspiracy to deny my constitutional rights, and the warden would be the prime conspirator). So, according to policy, I submitted a complaint to the Regional B.O.P. office, not against the DHO, but against the prison staff who rejected my complaint without a legitimate reason.

I submitted this «rejection appeal» with copies of all the documentation that showed my original complaint was submitted properly seven times over and was excessively clear in nature. I even provided a typed two-page summary that listed every submission, rejection, and other documented attempts to have my complaint heard (even asking the warden in person during his «walk-through»). The Regional office responded by saying it would «investigate», but it didn't say what it would investigate, nor when I should expect a response from the investigation. (As it turns out, inmates are never appraised of the results of such «investigations», unless they sue and get a court ordered subpoena; so there is no way for prisoners to have their complaint satisfied unless they sue, and they can't sue until they've «exhausted all attempts to have the complaint resolved at the institutional level»: Go figure).

Because my original complaint against the DHO was still not being addressed, and prison policy has strict time limits (20 to 30 days) for filing complaints (after which they are rejected automatically as «untimely»), I was forced to submit my «rjection appeal» to the Central B.O.P. office in Washington D.C.. Even this submission was rejected twice, before finally being «accepted» (for consideration), even though it too was properly submitted each time (the third time i submitted it with a three-page letter explaining to THEM what THEIR policies said that made the submission proper in all regards). The Central office accepted the rejection appeal, AND extended the time they had to respond, on the same day. The last time I submitted an appeal to the Central office (the actual disciplinary appeal concerning the same «child porn» B.S.) they did the same thing (accept and extend the response time on the same day) and then they never responded at all after the extended response date lapsed (that was six months ago). (P.S. I submitted the disciplinary appeal, and the complaint against the DHO's «unconstitutional conduct» separately on the advice of my lawyer, in order to prevent the B.O.P. lawyers from claiming that my disciplinary appeal did not address the issue of the DHO's «unconstitutional conduct». In other words, my lawyer and I are making double sure that the B.O.P. has every opportunity to «resolve the issue» before we take the case to a Federal judge, so the B.O.P. can't claim they never had a chance to «address the problem», i.e. legal gobbledegook.)

In the meantime, last week (the same day that a guard and a prisoner both got stabbed by another prisoner here on death row, in fact, I was escorted back to my cell just moments before the stabbing occured – see "So Much For Security"), an investigator from the Regional office finally did show up and asked me about all those rejection notices from the prison concerning my original complaint against the DHO. I was told the guard who came to get me for the interview that «Unit Team» wanted to see me. Since I'm not scheduled to see «Unit Team» for at least two more months, I knew something was amiss. So I explicitly asked what for, so I could bring any paperwork I needed with me (if I had known the truth, that it was an investigator from the Regional office, then I could have brought a whole stack of paperwork that documented in detail all my efforts to have my complaint heard, and all my evidence against the DHO). The guard told me he didn't know (another lie). So I put my hands through the slot in my door to let him cuff me (behind my back) and then they opened the door and escorted me to the attorney visiting room (which I had never been in or even seen before) where the investigator was waiting for me.

I didn't catch his name, but he seemed courteous and professional, which was a good sign. He also appeared to be at least cursorily familiar with not only the paperwork I submitted (which he had with him), but also other aspects of the case (such as the DHO's report, which I had not submitted to the Regional office because it was not directly relevant to the reason for the unjustified rejections). We spoke for over an hour as he very meticulously went over every rejection and my responses, using the two-page summary I submitted as a guideline.

He proposed a few different times that it appeared as though the clerk who was responsible for processing my complaints, and who ultimately rejected it seven times, must have been confused since it was so atypical. And, each time he did so I was careful to respectfully conceed his point, saying that yes, I thought the same thing even, but then how did the clerk miss all the bold lettering, highlighted texts, and direct policy quotes that I provided over and over in each response. I told the investigator that there «appeared» to be only two explanations; either the clerk was deliberately rejecting the complaint for invented reasons, or she was incompetent in her job. The investigator actually opened his mouth to retort my observation, but then nothing came out. Judging by the way his eyes flickered back and forth at this moment it appeared as though he tried to, but couldn't, come up with an argument against that one.

In the end, he told me that I would not be appraised of the outcome of his «investigation»; but, if the warden contacted me in regards to my complaint against the DHO, then I would at least know the result. I got the impression that that was what he was thinking should happen (i.e. he seemed to concur that all the facts I had presented in my case were consistent and correct, which meant my original complaint against the DHO had in truth been unfairly rejected, for whatever reason). In fact, by the end of the interview we had become so cordial that I even told him about my plans to propose marriage to my girlfriend; news that he seemed to respectfully appreciate (I have since proposed, and she said, «Yes!»). He even asked a few polite questions about the engagement ring, and how we planned to get married, before he got up and signaled the guard waiting outside in the hall to take me back to my cell.

I truly appreciated the way the interview ended on such an unofficial and cordial note. I thanked him for his time and returned to my cell.


[J.D. February 15, 2016]